Trouble logging in?We were forced to invalidate all account passwords. You will have to reset your password to login. If you have trouble resetting your password, please send us a message with as much helpful information as possible, such as your username and any email addresses you may have used to register. Whatever you do, please do not create a new account. That is not the right solution, and it is against our forum rules to own multiple accounts.

Well, if you look at it from Israel's point of view, the unrelenting daily Qassam rockets landing in residential areas was really warranting an appropriate response. Remember, Israel gave Hamas ample time to stop firing rockets into Israel from Gaza, and they didn't. So at some point, Israel had enough and decided to them have it.

Though, it does look like 'using a cannon to kill a mosquito'. Ah well, and so the cycle of violence continues.

I think, a better representation that takes into account the context, would be targeting a single bee inside a bee-hive and throwing a cannon-ball at that single bee.

And, another sad part of this story is that Obama is still vacationing (I do not even care about what the Bush would say, even his own people does not respect him, the rest of the world would be better off without his comments).

As silly as all of the analogies are, it's interesting that Hamas is doing everything in its power to maximize civilian casualties.

Think about what would happen if Israel approached the situation with the same mentality.

Of course, in the meantime, I say Israel should let Gaza have it and keep giving it to them until Hamas cries uncle. And if they don't cry uncle, oh well...

DEATH FROM ABOVE!!

I hate to point out.. Israel is currently doing the exact same thing, their current actions of airstrikes on Gaza is no different than typical terrorism. They are not targeting government bodies or the military, but rather an Islamic University, doing harm to innocent civilians. That's terrible of them! More over, Israel is taking this sort of action just a few days after Christmas. It's sad actually.

Edit

Currently, there are about 286 deaths in Israel and 900+ wounded. On the other hand, the numbers of people died over the Islamic University airstrike totals 307, while the number of injured are unknown. Israel killed more people.

__________________

Last edited by Shadow Kira01; 2008-12-28 at 22:37.
Reason: added death tolls

If the USA didn't f*cking support Israel with billions worth of weapons, they'd be forced to make some sort of peace agreement with Hamas. Damn we are totally retarded.

The USA also created perhaps the biggest atrocity in the history of international relations...the aberration that is the UN.

Honestly, that thing was created to prevent another WW2 or Cold War. Except here's the thing...no civilized nation will ever...EVER attack another. Simply because war is no longer economically profitable.

No matter how aggressive Russia may seem, it will never attack the U.S. If you watched "The Russian Gamble", which had Erin Burnett doing a major reporting stint in Russia, the entire reason for Russia's military buildup is simply to be used as a trading chip for other far more important things.

In the meantime, IMO, the UN should be disbanded. This whole "bleeding heart" and "policing of the world" are the reasons why the Palestinians still exist today. If Israel would be given Carte Blanche to do what it needed to in order to secure its security, the middle east would go from the terrorist spawning grounds of the world to the most peaceful it's ever been, and all within extremely short order, at least once Israel procures the F-35s...

If the USA didn't f*cking support Israel with billions worth of weapons, they'd be forced to make some sort of peace agreement with Hamas. Damn we are totally retarded.

If the US didn't support Isreal with those weapons, they'd just buy them from France and Russia or make them themselves. Most likely France, as Isreal has in the past bought quite a few aircraft from them. Rather than not selling Isreal weapons, applying political pressure to get them to stop the attacks would be far more effective. Of course that's not going to happen anytime soon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Demongod86

The USA also created perhaps the biggest atrocity in the history of international relations...the aberration that is the UN.

Honestly, that thing was created to prevent another WW2 or Cold War. Except here's the thing...no civilized nation will ever...EVER attack another. Simply because war is no longer economically profitable.

No matter how aggressive Russia may seem, it will never attack the U.S. If you watched "The Russian Gamble", which had Erin Burnett doing a major reporting stint in Russia, the entire reason for Russia's military buildup is simply to be used as a trading chip for other far more important things.

In the meantime, IMO, the UN should be disbanded. This whole "bleeding heart" and "policing of the world" are the reasons why the Palestinians still exist today. If Israel would be given Carte Blanche to do what it needed to in order to secure its security, the middle east would go from the terrorist spawning grounds of the world to the most peaceful it's ever been, and all within extremely short order, at least once Israel procures the F-35s...

The only way to defeat terrorism is to cut off the terrorist's support. There are two ways basic ways to accomplish that, either convince those people that it's not in their best interest to continue supporting terrorists, or kill those people. Are you seriously advocating the latter?

As for your, "well war isn't economicly profitable" arguement, that's pretty much always been true, unless you're running a defence company and your side isn't losing. War not being profitable didn't stop WW1, nor did it stop WW2.

The UN may not be perfect, but as an organization, they've done some really good work. Of course their main contribution has been in humanitarian work, and their peacekeeping successes don't get publicized nearly as much as their failures. Without the UN, there'd be a lot more people dying, even if we only take away their work eliminating small pox in the third world.

Honestly, that thing was created to prevent another WW2 or Cold War. Except here's the thing...no civilized nation will ever...EVER attack another. Simply because war is no longer economically profitable.

You know, it's sort of funny you say that. I've heard those statements before; the idea that war is no longer economically profitable is very popular among a certain type of academic.

Specifically, the type that existed around the end of the 19th century, when they were certain that the increased economic interdependence within Europe had guaranteed an age of peace that would last forever. As even a brief perusal of th 20th century tells you, that is exactly what happened; the industrialized, economically-interconnected world that arose following the industrial revolution ended war forever.

Like many of the UN's critics, you don't understand its purpose or its limitations. First, the UN has never done anything to Israel beyond empty words; it can't, because the United States has a permanent veto seat on it. The UN can do nothing binding without the explicit permission of all the major nations in the world, including the United States.

If that seems like it keeps the UN from doing, well, almost anything important, that's correct. The UN's purpose is not actually to "police of the world", though it forms a useful forum for the world's major nations to cooperate on that. It isn't intended to deny or grant Israel anything (and it doesn't; the UN has no say in Israel's upcoming ground attack beyond letters of condemnation.)

It is not intended to prevent Russia from attacking, if it ever comes to that. How could it?

Instead, the UN was created as a successor to the League of Nations, which was created after WWI. Its purpose is solely to encourage communication and cooperation between nations on matters of international importance, to encourage clarity on individual nation's goals and the things that they will or will not accept.

The purpose is to avoid another accidental war along the lines of World War I -- one where no nation knew the actual alliances or how other nations would react because of them. It encourages nations to write a lot of those empty words, because when a nation's position is poorly understood, unnecessary wars can result.

It can't prevent another World War II, and isn't intended to; but it can, perhaps, prevent another World War I. That is its purpose. Everything else is purely secondary, taking advantage of its status as a useful international forum.

It has no special powers, no secret controls over nations, no ability to compel anything; its capabilities are exactly equal to what its member states choose to commit, and the only reason its dictates have any real force is because they can only be passed with the agreement of all the most powerful nations in the world, including the United States. It is a centralized forum intended to prevent the splintering of national dialogs that resulted in World War I, nothing more.

It serves an extremely important role in doing that -- but it isn't intended to end other wars, or right wrongs, or anything magical along those lines. It is just a framework to encourage open discussions between nations, and ensure that none of the major actors on the world stage go against the will of the other major world powers without at least realizing that they are doing so (as happened in the lead-up to World War I.)

Let me make this clear: Racist hate speech or any speech that devalues human life is not permitted on this forum. I just removed a conversation thread of about 10 posts that began with some remarkably intolerant hate speech. If you encounter that sort of garbage on the forum, never reply, just report it. The post will be deleted and the poster infracted and/or banned. Discussions about politics can provoke some very extreme views and reactions, but when you suggest that the deaths of thousands wouldn't be a bad thing, you're way passed the point of crossing the line.

Anyway, with that being said, back to your regularly scheduled discussion thread. Thanks your attention.

If the US didn't support Isreal with those weapons, they'd just buy them from France and Russia or make them themselves. Most likely France, as Isreal has in the past bought quite a few aircraft from them. Rather than not selling Isreal weapons, applying political pressure to get them to stop the attacks would be far more effective. Of course that's not going to happen anytime soon.

So... we should still give them weapons?

The USA gives a lot to Israel. I'm sure France and other nations would fill the gap if the US didn't give them aid, but the thing is it wouldn't be free/cheap any way you look at it. I don't think Russia would give Israel weapons, since they never have in the past and because of Israel's alignment.

Israel have his own weapon's industry, they don't buy everything. If I am not mistaken ,they started when DeGaule stopped the shippement of french jets to Israel.

I don't think the russian would sell weapons to Israel because they are already selling to the others countrys of the region. Usualy french sell to anybody, they are all doing it, but France and China are maybe the less scrupulous.

olitics returned to the streets of Thailand on Monday as thousands of antigovernment protesters surrounded the Parliament building, forcing a delay in the legislature’s opening session under a new government.
With power changing hands in Thailand, the protests shifted as well, this time to the “red shirts” who support Thaksin Shinawatra, the former prime minister who was ousted in a coup in 2006. A pro-Thaksin government was dissolved Dec. 2 when a court determined that the governing party had committed electoral fraud.
The demonstration called to mind recent protests by anti-Thaksin “yellow shirts” who had barricaded the prime minister’s office for three months and shut down Bangkok’s airports for a week this month.
Chai Chidchob, the Parliament speaker, said the new session was being postponed until Tuesday morning because of threats to the safety of lawmakers.